Gullscorer wrote:We're asked to believe that Philip Marshall shot his kids, and his dog, and then shot himself; that neighbours never heard the shots; and that he did this despite there being no apparent motive.

The former airline pilot's controversial conspiracy book 'The Big Bamboozle: 9/11 and the War on Terror' was released last year. While he was writing it, Marshall believed that his life was in danger because of the allegations involved.

He is not the only person with connections to top-secret work, questionable events, or Government decisions, whose death has been too quickly explained away, leaving more questions than answers.

Strangely enough it was Pope Gregory the 9th inviting me for drinks aboard his steam yacht, the saucy sue currently wintering in montego bay with the England cricket team and the Balanese Goddess of plenty.

Strangely enough it was Pope Gregory the 9th inviting me for drinks aboard his steam yacht, the saucy sue currently wintering in montego bay with the England cricket team and the Balanese Goddess of plenty.

Actually funny that because at Uni in Lincoln I did an animal based degree and for one module we had to do group work and pick a subject regarding animal welfare legislation to present to the rest of the class and this lad wanted to do it about bestiality! F*cking freak! I said to him in no uncertain terms, "look sunshine, we're doing circuses and the use of animals in them NOT your sick idea - capiche or you get a broken arm?".

He agreed and we passed it with 78%!!

You can't go back

Strangely enough it was Pope Gregory the 9th inviting me for drinks aboard his steam yacht, the saucy sue currently wintering in montego bay with the England cricket team and the Balanese Goddess of plenty.

ferrarilover wrote:Ukip are almost as dangerous as the Green Party. They have one main line of attack and they will sacrifice everything else in pursuit of that. Once they've demonised all the Muslims and withdrawn us from the protection of Europe, then what? What about the roads or press regulation or the cost of the TV license or anything else. They know they won't be elected, so they can say what they like. They can make all the empty, ill thought-out, basist promises they like to appeal to the Daily Mail reading faux middle class, but once they're in, the realities of day to day politics will be entirely beyond them. We saw a similar thing, but to a much lesser extent with the Lib Dems. They spent years promising to give out free this and massively increased that, then they came to some power and found that they had to make good on their promises. Unfortunately, the cost of doing all they had promised was greater than the amount of money in existence, so they couldn't do it.

Theoretical politics is lovely, we all like to indulge in it with our mates down the pub
However, the reality of the world doesn't allow for it. We'd all give free health care to everyone always and build a million miles of new road and turf out all those who really shouldn't be here and lock up burglars for 100,000 years. Sadly, the are so many hurdles between Eutopia and reality that we have to be content with some mediocre middle ground.

Matt.

So you are an anarchist then, seems you believe politics is pointless and purely thereto quell the masses and make them think they have freedom and choice.

As do I my friend, as do I.

Perhaps we should get you a tinfoil hat.

To some extent, I suppose I am. An awful lot of the world is smoke and mirrors. We see the effect of this all over the world, all the time. At a local level, the London riots. Those people didn't magic out of the ether, fuck shit up, then disappear again. They were living among us all along. The night before the riots, most of them would have been walking those very streets, perfectly peacefully. Behaving as we do, largely within the rules laid down by Government, through Statute, by common law, through the Judiciary and by social norms and etiquette, is a choice. If people choose to live outside of these rules, there is precious little that the Government of the day can do about it. The sum total of their efforts during London was to dress up some police officers in American Football uniforms and let them stand about, watching the destruction. They were completely powerless to do anything about it.

If you've seen the movie The Purge, firstly, you have my sympathies. Secondly, you'll recall the idea that the security systems installed by Ethan Hawke's character were "there to look good, they aren't fool proof" and that is exactly the way that Government's operate. They know that if they talk a good game and look the part, then the vast majority of the people, the vast majority of the time, will simply toe the line through a combination of a lack of will to do otherwise and the (completely unfounded, as it turns out, as we've demonstrated) fear of reprisals from the State.

It's not only law and order where we see this. Clearly, there's very little that can be done about natural disaster, aside from taking common sense precautions. The financial crisis was, of course, so large that no Government of any persuasion could have prevented it affecting us. However, that doesn't stop today's mob claiming that the last lot handled it badly and the last lot claiming that today's mob would have made it worse still. Truth is, what happens, happens and those in charge (or at least appearing to be in charge) are just as much passengers, interested onlookers as the rest of us.

All this lark about them controlling this and that and the other is a load of old tosh. This is a Government that can't arrange so much as an NHS IT system, let alone anything more complex. They are no more and no less competent than any other. 9/11 wasn't a CIA conspiracy. The moon landings weren't filmed on a sound stage in Nevada. There are no aliens in Area 51. These things are, perhaps, just about credible to the imagination, but can you envisage some of our clowns trying to arrange such a thing? How many of our politicians can't even bugger a rent boy on Clapham Common or fiddle their taxes without getting caught? Now imagine these same incompetent morons trying to organise something like the aforementioned "conspiracies". Do me a favour.

The trouble is Matt, that governments are just the visible tips of the icebergs and perhaps that is all we're supposed to see. You have to look beneath the surface of things to find the hidden dangers, into the dark recesses to find the powers behind the thrones, and behind the closed doors to discover those who really influence and control governments and events.

Otherwise, we can keep our heads down, get on with our little lives, and pray that we won't wake up one day to suddenly realise that democracy is a sham, that we have no real freedom, and that the world is a prison.

ferrarilover wrote:Ukip are almost as dangerous as the Green Party. They have one main line of attack and they will sacrifice everything else in pursuit of that. Once they've demonised all the Muslims and withdrawn us from the protection of Europe, then what? What about the roads or press regulation or the cost of the TV license or anything else. They know they won't be elected, so they can say what they like. They can make all the empty, ill thought-out, basist promises they like to appeal to the Daily Mail reading faux middle class, but once they're in, the realities of day to day politics will be entirely beyond them. We saw a similar thing, but to a much lesser extent with the Lib Dems. They spent years promising to give out free this and massively increased that, then they came to some power and found that they had to make good on their promises. Unfortunately, the cost of doing all they had promised was greater than the amount of money in existence, so they couldn't do it.

Theoretical politics is lovely, we all like to indulge in it with our mates down the pub
However, the reality of the world doesn't allow for it. We'd all give free health care to everyone always and build a million miles of new road and turf out all those who really shouldn't be here and lock up burglars for 100,000 years. Sadly, the are so many hurdles between Eutopia and reality that we have to be content with some mediocre middle ground.

Matt.

So you are an anarchist then, seems you believe politics is pointless and purely thereto quell the masses and make them think they have freedom and choice.

As do I my friend, as do I.

Perhaps we should get you a tinfoil hat.

To some extent, I suppose I am. An awful lot of the world is smoke and mirrors. We see the effect of this all over the world, all the time. At a local level, the London riots. Those people didn't magic out of the ether, f**k sh*t up, then disappear again. They were living among us all along. The night before the riots, most of them would have been walking those very streets, perfectly peacefully. Behaving as we do, largely within the rules laid down by Government, through Statute, by common law, through the Judiciary and by social norms and etiquette, is a choice. If people choose to live outside of these rules, there is precious little that the Government of the day can do about it. The sum total of their efforts during London was to dress up some police officers in American Football uniforms and let them stand about, watching the destruction. They were completely powerless to do anything about it.

If you've seen the movie The Purge, firstly, you have my sympathies. Secondly, you'll recall the idea that the security systems installed by Ethan Hawke's character were "there to look good, they aren't fool proof" and that is exactly the way that Government's operate. They know that if they talk a good game and look the part, then the vast majority of the people, the vast majority of the time, will simply toe the line through a combination of a lack of will to do otherwise and the (completely unfounded, as it turns out, as we've demonstrated) fear of reprisals from the State.

It's not only law and order where we see this. Clearly, there's very little that can be done about natural disaster, aside from taking common sense precautions. The financial crisis was, of course, so large that no Government of any persuasion could have prevented it affecting us. However, that doesn't stop today's mob claiming that the last lot handled it badly and the last lot claiming that today's mob would have made it worse still. Truth is, what happens, happens and those in charge (or at least appearing to be in charge) are just as much passengers, interested onlookers as the rest of us.

All this lark about them controlling this and that and the other is a load of old tosh. This is a Government that can't arrange so much as an NHS IT system, let alone anything more complex. They are no more and no less competent than any other. 9/11 wasn't a CIA conspiracy. The moon landings weren't filmed on a sound stage in Nevada. There are no aliens in Area 51. These things are, perhaps, just about credible to the imagination, but can you envisage some of our clowns trying to arrange such a thing? How many of our politicians can't even bugger a rent boy on Clapham Common or fiddle their taxes without getting caught? Now imagine these same incompetent morons trying to organise something like the aforementioned "conspiracies". Do me a favour.

Matt.

I like your response there, can see where your coming from.

All i'd say is, i agree entirely, there is no way the government or an alphabet agency alone could orgainse any of these things. But i would suggest looking at the government as a front, a group of puppets put there to create the impression that we the people have some kind of choice and freedom. There are hidden people pulling the strings behind all governments, including the monetary systems and the ebb and flow of money.

When it comes to organising something like 911, no it wasn't the CIA as such, but likely 1 or 2 people in the CIA were involved, as maybe 1 or 2 government advisors and mayeb some form the NSA, but it would nevr have been an offical play, not even top secret. You have to look beyond the front organisations and see where the people at the top of this tree are connected. Sometimes it's through a Masonic Lodge, not your avergae run of the mill lodge. Sometimes they are related, checkout bloodlines and the Bush family tree, or the Royal family.

Just a suggestion. But this stuff takes time to research and isn't pretty, however, i don't think of myself as a doommonger, i think an awareness of this stuff is enlightening and leads to a far more positive outlook on life.

More on the outrageous proposal by some former European leaders to criminalise all criticism of feminist ideology: European Dignity Watch, the civil rights watchdog group based in Brussels, has warned that this directive â€œaims to impose governmental control over the social and economic behavior of citizens in the widest possible sense.â€

In a scathing critique, the group says that the ECTR Frameworkâ€™s basic principles are flawed and that it â€œinterferes in an unprecedented manner with citizensâ€™ freedom and rightsâ€ and â€œdistorts the concepts of â€˜justiceâ€™ and â€˜equalityâ€™.â€

Through â€œa reversal of the burden of proof,â€ the proposal â€œencourages frivolous litigationâ€ and will lead to â€œinstitutionalized public controlâ€ of private opinion and thought, they say.

The Framework demands the outlawing of â€œgroup libelâ€ that it defines as â€œdefamatory comments made in public and aimed against a groupâ€¦or members thereof, with a view to inciting to violence, slandering the group, holding it to ridicule or subjecting it to false charges.â€

It adds that â€œgroup libelâ€ â€œmay appear to be aimed at members of the group in a different time (another historical era) or place (beyond the borders of the State).â€

Subject to criminal sanctions would be any â€œhate crimesâ€ that would include not only â€œincitement to violenceâ€ but â€œovert approval of a totalitarian ideology, xenophobia or anti-Semitism.â€

â€œMembers of vulnerable and disadvantaged groupsâ€ it adds, â€œare entitled to a special protectionâ€ in addition to the normal legal protections afforded by the state. This â€œspecial protectionâ€¦may imply a preferential treatmentâ€ for those identified as â€œvulnerableâ€.

The Framework said it hopes to take â€œconcrete action to combat intolerance, in particular with a view to eliminating racism, colour bias, ethnic discrimination, religious intolerance, totalitarian ideologies, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, anti-feminism and homophobia.â€

The document proposes not only to outlaw what it defines as â€œintoleranceâ€ by governments, but also by individual citizens. It says, â€œIt is important to stress that tolerance must be practised not only by Governmental bodies but equally by individuals, including members of one group vis-Ã -vis another.â€ It adds that the â€œguarantee of tolerance must be understood not only as a vertical relationship (Government-to-individuals) but also as a horizontal relationship (group-to-group and person-to-person).

â€œIt is the obligation of the Government to ensure that intolerance is not practised either in vertical or in horizontal relationships,â€ it states.

Sophia Kuby, spokesman for European Dignity Watch, said the Framework betrays the essentially totalitarian mindset of significant elements within the European Unionâ€™s apparatus. The document, if adopted by the European Parliament, she said, â€œcould lead to situations in which vague or unwarranted accusations are leveled against individuals and groups.â€

â€œFaith-based groups and schools, adherents of a particular religion or even just parents who want to teach their children certain moral values would all be put under general suspicion of being intolerant.â€

â€œEven worse,â€ she said, this language â€œcould lead to the possibility that charges are brought on unclear or even without legal grounds.â€ She said it would â€œbe a significant step backward,â€ and â€œwould certainly be a dark day for European democracy.â€

Pea wrote:
The financial crisis was, of course, so large that no Government of any persuasion could have prevented it affecting us.
Matt.

The "Financial crisis" as you call it was a perfectly planned operation by those quite content to sit in the background propping up the monetary system that was put in place a long time ago to gradually strip us all of not only our wealth but also our individuality.

The "Government" did exactly as they were told, just like they always do.